> > >  So, you had
> > > better be sure you're doing the right thing or you will have 
> > > adverse karma as a result.
> > 
> > ...so it's still a crapshoot.
> 
> Not entirely, nature gives us two resources to 'check' 
> behavior, One is scripture and the other is intuition 
> or 'conscience', which is an expression of intuition.

There are at least three. :-) Another taught in
some Buddhist traditions involves assessing one's
*own* state of attention as a measure of "right" 
and "wrong."

That is, one is trained in discerning the minute
variations in state of attention as it fluctuates
day to day, hour to hour, minute to minute. Your
state of attention changes all the time; it's just
that most people haven't ever gained the discrim-
ination to notice how *much* it changes from minute
to minute. The training involves discerning which 
shifts in state of attention are "up" (meaning one 
has shifted to a higher state of attention) and which
are "down" (shifted to a lower state of attention).

Then, after having become somewhat practiced at 
this, you just watch your *own* state of attention
as you act and make your way through the world.
If you perform Action X, in Context Y, and your
state of attention goes "down," you can pretty
much be sure that your choice of action in that
context was "wrong," or at least not as "right"
as it could be. Similarly, if you perform Action X
in Context Y and your state of attention goes "up,"
then you did the "right" thing.

This -- for those who can practice it -- is actually
looked upon as a more efficient method of determining
"right" and "wrong" than either scripture or intuition.
Scripture has the drawback of being "fixed" and unaware
of *context*, so a "rule" that says "Never kill pigs"
might be inappropriate in the case of a crazy pig
about to kill a young toddler. And intuition is a hit-
and-miss proposition for most seekers; sometimes it's
right on, sometimes it's not.

But watching one's own state of attention, once you've
gotten the hang of it, never fails. The reason is that
there is a long-term aspect of karma that says that if
you do something wrong ALL of the negative energy your
actions produce will return to you. That's "long-term"
because it may take lifetimes for all that energy to
return to you. But there is also an *instantaneous*
aspect of karma -- do something "wrong* and your state
of attention goes "down." Immediately. Do something
"right" and your state of attention goes "up." Immed-
iately. Thus you can use your own fluctuating states
of attention as a guideline.

The drawbacks of this approach are two. First, the
discrimination necessary to practice it can only be
taught via transmission -- by "broadcasting" states of
attention to the students and then varying them some-
what and asking them what they perceived when the 
shared state of attention changed. The second, of 
course, is that when you do "wrong" you only really
find out about it *afterwards*, as you state of 
attention has started to slide "down." The latter
becomes less and less of a problem as you become
used to the discernment. You *start* to act a certain
way, get an instantaneous "readout" that you're going
the "wrong" way by realizing that your state of atten-
tion is lowering, and thus you correct your path and
go a different way. The whole process is that fast;
you can make such decisions in microseconds.



Reply via email to